“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas

Friday, April 03, 2015

If you like your nukes, you can keep your nukes

Why is it that American president after American president believe that rogue countries in the middle east will tell us the truth and negotiate in good faith? They'll negotiate and strike whatever deal we need them to in order for us to go away, and then they go right back to doing exactly what we think we've bargained then out of doing.

There won't be any transparent inspections. There won't be any deadlines met. It'll all be political charades so the compliant American media can cement Obama's legacy as the grand peace-maker.

13 comments:

I think you are mistaken on this, Ed. Iran is signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and cooperates fully with IAEA inspectors. In other words Iran has established a track record of transparent inspections. There is no reason to think that will change, post treaty.

Ron Paul, in an answer to a debate question in 2011(youtube.com/watch?v=BDvaTqLlZlA)said, in effect, that the U.S. should butt out of Iran's business. I agreed then and I agree now.

Isaac, I also am in favor of staying out of the business of countries where we have no business, but I've heard many nuclear power experts report that some of the nuclear infrastructure in Iran's bunkers, have no purpose if their goals are peaceful energy production....only if their goals are weapons.

Furthermore, without at least trying to stop the world's leading terror state from having nukes, there will definitely be a nuke arms race over there and eventually somebody will set one off.

If it's conventional weapons, who gives a shit what they do to each other, let them fight it out, but nukes are a game changer for the globe. I'm a little less libertarian when it comes to nukes in the hands of a rogue state like Iran.

I know Isaac will question why I don't throw Israel into the same "rogue" group, but they've had nukes for years and have never used them, nor are the exporters of terrorism....the Hamas-controlled Palestinians notwithstanding.

And whatever we do we cannot let the specter of a nuclear-armed terrorist state like Iran, and the likelihood of a nuke race in the middle east, make us lose sight of the real threat facing the US......Christian-owned bakeries in the mid-west.

“…there is virtually nothing in the substance of the [Iranian] deal for the War Party to attack. So what they [Ed et al] are doing is desperately hurtling the Iranian axis-of-evil narrative at the agreement, claiming that the regime is so untrustworthy, diabolical and existentially dangerous that no product of mere diplomacy is valid. The Iranians are by axiom hell-bent on evil and no mere ‘scrap of paper’ will stop them.

But therein dwells the game-changing opportunity. To defeat the deal, the War Party will have to defend its three-decade long campaign of exaggerations, distortions and bellicose animosity toward the Iranian state. But that is impossible because the axis-of-evil narrative was never remotely true.”

Iran's not a direct threat to the US, but they are a direct threat to Israel, as stated by them.

Are you trying to say they don't export terrorism and threaten their neighbors in that part of the world. Why are the Saudi's shaking in their boots and talking about a nuclear program of their own, if Iran isn't a threat?